Skip to main content

About your Search

English 60
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 60 (some duplicates have been removed)
. and then this party that paraded around as the big deficit hawks, the guys that wanted to control spending, the only cuts they put on the table is playing at margins, increasing retirement age from 65 to 67 and adjusting rates for social security. this hasn't presented itself as a party that wants to cut spending. on one hand you have president obama's proposal, which most agree is the responsible way of raising the debt, raising rates. and responsible cuts on entitlements and discretionary spending versus republicans who are divided against something that is a chicken hawk when it comes to the deficits, that is the boehner approach, or the more extremist position which is absolutely nothing.รง so this is an extraordinary position for the republican party to have evolved into. >> you must respond to what julian just said. >> i like julian an awful lot but i think what he said is entirely wrong. it's fascinating president obama last july, july of 2011, said we can get $1.2 trillion in revenue where we don't have to raise marginal tax rates and close loopholes and julian says most economists agree, i
situation to be in. >> as the conversation shifts really to the bottom line in the deficit. at the end of the day the whole thing is about -- it's optical illusions and face saving for republicans. whether it's the notion they may not vote yes but just present, which is complete smoke and mirrors or the fundamental argument which is closing loopholes is not a tax increase. of course it is. at the core this is about asking americans to pay more americans to the federal government. this is just -- it's -- bill clinton called it kabuki theater. it's a way for republicans not to be ashamed and walk back the ideological core they've run on for the past few years. >> if president obama is able to come out and say i'm going to support getting rid of tax ducks for charitable organizations, hospitals, universities, religious organizations, i want to get rid of that tax deduction f he puts his finger -- his hand anywhere near that decision, he's going to be a loony toon every hospital, church, philanthropic in the united states, from the rockefeller down to the littlest catholic charity will fig
. [ screaming ] oh grover! electric deficit boogaloo. 29 minutes after the hour. right back on "the stephanie miller show." >> wow! i've never seen anything like this. >> when disaster strikes sometimes the only way out is to look within. current tv digs deep into the determination and escape. "trapped" experience the drama. back to back to back. >> hold on mates! >> catch the "trapped" mini-marathon saturday starting at 1 eastern. on current tv. rich, chewy caramel rolled up in smooth milk chocolate. don't forget about that payroll meeting. rolo.get your smooth on. also in minis. get irresistibly clean and fresh carpets in your home with resolve deep clean powder. the moist powder removes three times more dirt than vacuuming alone while neutralizing odors for a clean you can see, smell and really enjoy. don't just vacuum clean. resolve clean. [ singing christmas carols in background ] aunt sally's singing again. it's a tradition honey. [ singing christmas carols ] mmmm. [ female announcer ] make new traditions with pillsbury grands! cinnamon rolls. [ f
. tea party 2, the sequel. [ screaming ] oh grover! electric deficit boogaloo. 29 minutes after the hour. right back on "the stephanie miller show." alright, in 15 minutes we're going to do the young turks. i think the number one thing that viewers like about the young turks is that we're honest. they know that i'm not bs'ing them with some hidden agenda, actually supporting one party or the other. when the democrats are wrong, they know that i'm going to be the first one to call them out. they can question whether i'm right, but i think that the audience gets that this guy, to the best of his ability, is trying to look out for us. [ male announcer ] red lobster's crabfest ends soon. hurry in and try five succulent entrees like our tender snow crab paired with savory garlic shrimp. just $12.99. come into red lobster and sea food differently. and introducing 7 lunch choices for just $7.99. salads, sandwiches, and more. rich, chewy caramel rolled up in smooth milk chocolate. don't forget about that payroll meeting. rolo.get your smooth
us with the deficit of one. that is the deficit. sizable it is. this will be the president's fourth for which he is personally responsible, fourth deficit in excess of a trillion dollars. president obama wants to plug that trillion dollars hole by raising taxes on household incomes, as we all know that have incomes over $250,000. the top 2%. that would bring in $802 million, $82 billion. that'sbout 8% of that deficit. so does that suggt we have a tax problem or, perhaps, a spending problem? think about this taxpayers making more than $250,000 representing the top 2% paid more than 46% f all texas. that would seem like a pretty fair deal to most of us, but the president says it is not fair. we don't know what that number is. how much should it be? and contrary to what the president would have you believe as he campaigns untack sites all around the country and against the wealthy, he's doing a lot of that. the bush tax rates are not the root of our problems. in fact, individual tax payments rose, get this, $2,303,000,000,000 or 26%. over the past two ears. under those very low unshare
talked about during the campaign, which is a balanced, responsible approach to deficit reduction that can help give businesses certainty and make sure that the country grows. and unfortunately, the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. >> sometimes you hear a sound byte and it sounds like the normal talking points of the campaign that you always here, you're always hearing politicians saying the same thing. but listen again to that last thing that the president said there. >> unfortunately the speaker's proposal right now is still out of balance. >> speaker's proposal is out of balance. empirical statement, sort of. there's a way to judge whether or not that statement is true. what's happening in washington is both sides, republicans and democrats, are making offers and counteroffers about how to deal with the fiscal mess that they created. this artificial debt line that washington created. the white house made its offer to republicans last week. they sent timothy geithner up to capitol hill to unveil the administration's offer to congressional republicans. the offer was e
ceiling is clear. >> this isn't about getting a handle on the deficits or debt for him. it's about spending even more than he already has. >> white house aides reject republican claims that holding the debt limit over the president head is the only mechanism to get him to trim spending. >> you are going to keep the debt limit goes higher and you're spending money. you and congress. >> president signed in law, $1 trillion in spending cuts. there is a specific proposal to achieve $600 billion in savings from our entitlement programs. including our healthcare entitlement program. jay carney went so far to compare republican pressure on debt creeling to hostage taking. >> this is a profoundly bad idea that i think could not be more frightening for american businesses. and american workers. >> of course, treasury secretary geithner it go may have also frightened people yesterday. by telling cnbc the white house is prepared to go off the fiscal cliff, unless the republicans bend on taxes. comment by former democratic presidential candidate howard dean frightened republics that this debat
of a process to reduce the deficit the others face. >> republicans don't like owning reform either. this was tom cole on sunday. >> only obama can fix entitlements. democrat versus democrat fight over entitlement which mirrors their fighting over taxes. a response to an argument that was starting before former adviser steve ratner and minnesota democratic congressman keith ellison with near glee. there is no real choice about that. we're clear social security is off the table. this is, to me, the much more interesting debate between tom and dan. >> you want republicans arguing. both sides are also battling for control of the debt ceiling which may represent the republicans' greatest point of leverage in these budget talks. goo the speaker of the house says that's a nonstarter. >> silliness. congress will never give up the power. i've made it clear to the president. we need cuts in reform greater than the increase in the debt limit. >> bottom line, you've got to put a detailed plan on the table that the white house ends up agreeing to some of it, rejects some of it in the same way t
income tax cuts. the republicans say the plan cuts the deficits by $4.6 trillion based on the white house method of counting based on the recommendations of the president's deficit reduction commission but the president could disagree. the republicans say the plan would raise $800 million through tax reform but not by phasing out the upper income bush tax cuts and before the plan was announced, white house press secretary insisted the rates will not make it to the new year. >> he will not sign a bill that extends those tax rates for the top 2 percent. we cannot afford it. it is not wise economic policy. not wise fiscal policy. it would defeat the principle of balance that he has embraced. >> the president wrapped up an hour long twitter session promoting what he called a balanced approach, as far as deficit reduction. >>shepard: is this posturing? >>reporter: well, it is, this great measure. each side wants to blame the other. and not just if we go over the cliff, but if they do reach an agreement, each side wants the other to take the blame for the parts of the ultimate compromise their
adds so much to the federal budget deficit. so republicans say raise the retirement age to 67 or means testing, meaning making more wealthy americans pay more into the system or get less out of the system. if you means test, that means you're paying less out to affluent americans. if you raise the retirement age, you're paying out less as money comes in and keeping the revenue line closer to the cost line. that is the goal. so when you do a 10 or 20-year calculation, medicare is not adding to the deficit. but that's the policy and just as republicans are having a backlash against the speaker saying we don't think we should put tax increases on the table, the democrats and some of the new members in congress, they say they ran promising not to touch medicare. so they say they won't do this. so you have the credibility challenge. republicans say give us entitlement and other spending cuts and the democrats want higher tax rates. that's why we have a stalemate. >>> an internet icon wanted in connection with the killing of his neighbor. stay with us, you're in "the situation room." that of
low for middle-class families against the urgency of addressing our national budget deficits. by keeping tax rates low for 98% of americans and letting the tax rates go up very modestly for families earning over $250,000 a year, the democratic plan would cut the deficit by as much as a trillion dollars over the next decade. now, that alone doesn't cure our budget imbalance, but along with fair and sensible tax reforms and smart cuts in spending, it is part of the solution. let's be clear about one thing. the middle-class tax cut act would still benefit high-end taxpayers. families making over $250,000 a year would pay lower tax rates on their first $250,000. so if a family made $255,000, they'd only see an increase on the top $5,000 and then only to the clinton era rates that were in effect during the 1990's when, as we all recall, our economy was thriving. under the senate-passed plan, a family earning $255,000 a year would pay an extra 150 bucks in taxes. in opposing the middle-class tax cuts act, republicans claim that it would hurt the economy to raise tax rates on the to
to reduce the deficit. jenna: interesting the president is saying he was speaking off the you have cuff, no teleprompter there. he's speaking about how he's rooting on american business. pointed to a couple of aspects much the economy, improvement in consumer confidence and housing as well. he was going to talk a little bit about the fiscal cliff and that's something we've all been talking about recently, and what it means for us right now and the year ahead. we also have other business news. we'll get back to the president by the way if and when we get that feedback. he will be taking questions from the audience there of business leaders as gregg mentioned. elizabeth mcdonald ever the fox business network is standing by list toning some of what the president had to say about the economy. liz, can you place it in context about where our economy is right now. >> reporter: the president just now was placing it in the -- the economy in the broader context of what is going on in the world, mentioning asia, mentioning europe, and then he turned to what was the most important part of the spee
the deficit and restructure fiscal policy. so as eventually to bring the budget into balance. this framework must include tax reforms to raise more revenue, encourage growth and enhance progressivity. it must include parameters defining future levels of debt as a share of the gdp. and a date by which the budget will balance. and it must include changes to discretionary spending, entitlements as well as defense. our elected leaders should launch an expedited process to enact legislation that will construct this framework many 2013 -- in 2013, including powerful but appropriate default and enforcement mechanisms. without a recalibrated, sustainable fiscal policy, the united states' international standing will decline, and its national security will be undermined. such an outcome would be bad for the united states and, in our view, bad for the world. as pete said, he and i are joined here today with three, by three distinguished individuals. er is slams of america for -- servants of america for decades who made a difference, who had to come up with tough solutions to very complex problems. and
reagan on what social security and medicare have nothing to do with the deficit? have you heard that clip? >> bill: no. i know that's the truth but i haven't heard that clip from ronald reagan. try to find it, dan. yeah. he said it in his day. it was true then. it is true today. >> that's right. he says even if you pull that money, if you took money from them, it wouldn't go to reduce the deficit. so if you can get that clip, i think he was running against bob dole or somebody. i forget who it was. >> in the primary is. >> yeah. we will try to find it. i am interested in that. >> that's the thing with the republicans today even though social security has may nottedy of money if we would stop stealing from it. it's not going to expire anyhow. i mean run out of money until it rungs short of money until something like 2035 and even then, it would pay most of the benefits. it's a non-issue of dealing with the debt crisis. but republicans hate social security. they've always wanted to abolish it ever since the days of franklin roosevelt and they are t
executives today in washington. he talked about negotiations with congressional republicans on deficit reduction and the so-called fiscal cliff. >> the holdup right now is that speaker boehner took a position -- i think the day after the campaign -- that said we're willing to bring in revenue, but we aren't willing to increase rates. and i just explained to you why we don't think that works. we're not trying to -- we're not insisting on rates just out of spite or any kind of partisan bickering. but rather because we need to raise a certain amount of revenue. now we have seen some movement over the last several days among some republicans. i think there's a recognition that maybe they can accept some rate increases as long as it's combined with serious entitlement reform and additional spending cuts. and if we can get the leadership on the republican side to take that framework, to acknowledge that reality. then the numbers actually aren't that far apart. another way of putting this is, we can probably solve this in about a week. it's not that tough. but we need that breakthrough that s
are aproasmed to chaiapproached tochair a commits to set up a deficit reduction plan for the country. you study it. you're very diligent. everybody hates it within 24 hours. the democrats say it's too austere. the republicans say you're raising tax too much. two years later as we stand on the precipiceave cliff, suddenly this plan as seen as the mosterably thing in town and people are coming to you to find out your sage advice. what happened in those two years? >> well, the people woke up. i think young people are waking up. you can't do this. you can't tax your way out of this hole. you can't grow your way out of this hole. we had every economist say you could have double-digit growth for 20 years and can't get out of the hole. you can't cut spending out of your hole. we got five democrats, five republicans, ranging from dick durbin to illinois-- great progressive democrat-- and coburn from oklahoma, and five dems, five republicans, one independent, that's a super majority. and for god's sake the reason we were so successful is that we effectively pissed off everybody in america. ( laughter ).
in this particular conference which was elected to be a fiscally conservative and try to reduce the deficit. however, myself and members of our team were standing outside and talked to dozens of members and it does seem as though internally he didn't get an earful. they are very upset that the counteroffer includes $800 billion in new tack revenue but behind the scenes he's been able to hold the conference together and they are staying unified behind him in going forward with the process and the speaker was asked why that is. here's what he said. >> our members understand the seriousness of the situation that our country faces. trillion dollar deficits for as far as the eye can see. $16 trillion worth of debt already on the books. every man, woman, and child owing the government over $50,000 and that number is increasing every single year. and i think as a result our members understand that we've got to solve the problem and we will. >> so the bottom line is it really seems obvious, especially after talking to members coming out of that meeting, that they have been able to at least so far turn the r
years to reduce the deficit and restructure the fiscal policy. so is eventually to bring the budget into balance. this framework must include tax reforms to raise more revenues and encourage growth and enhance productivity. it must include parameters defined in future levels of debt as a share of the gdp. it must include changes to discretionary spending and entitlements as well as defense. our elected leaders should launch legislation that will construct this framework and 2013. including powerful but appropriate default of enforcement mechanisms. without a recalibrated unsustainable fiscal policy, the united states international standing will decline in the national security will be undermined. such an outcome would be bad for the united states, and it could be bad for the world. as pete said, he and i are joined here today by three distinguished individuals. those serving america for decades made who made a difference in how to come up with solutions to very complex problems. it has been a privilege for me to be with them in approaching what this coalition and those who are not h
for raising revenues, cutting spending and reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the next ten years. he said the ball is in the g.o.p.'s court. >> you have heard them for the first time i think in two decades they are willing to have revenues go up to make a balanced plan but they have to tell you what they want do on rates and revenues. >> he says there is no plan to an agreement unless they acknowledge tax rates have to go up for the wealthiest americans. >> heather: thank you very much. with less than one month to reach a deal there is new urgency to reach a deal. coming up our political panel will debate the zik go points. >> brand-new reaction today from the potential nominee of u.n. ambassador susan rice to be the next secretary of state. a senator reiterating concerns about statements she made following the benghazi attack that left four americans dead. in the meantime, clare mccaskill came to the ambassador's defense. >> she had reviewed the dpeor foer going. >> on sunday shows and went well beyond the talking points, we have decimated al-qaeda, that was nowhere on the talking points
and deficit -- why would the president be proposing $255 billion in war spending? >> well, he's not. what he is proposing is shifting spending priorities. after those cuts, shifting priorities, and by the way -- this is infrastructure development. this is to make sure that people who have gone the payroll tax relief keep that payroll tax relief and expanding unemployment benefits. i will say this. this is the president's initial proposal. the silence from the republicans is deafening. they can counter this. but all they have done is whine and weep and cry and laugh about like hysterical children. where is there for books will? be one less give the viewers the numbers. if there is a 50 billion dollars stimulus proposal for the infrastructure problem, he also wants to extend unemployment benefits and extend the two percentage point payroll tax and adding it all up together, it equals $255 billion out of the federal government pocket. we got into this cliff because they thought there was too much spending that we could not pay for, and they made the president insists that he wanted to raise our
balanced approach to reducing the deficit. here is a house republican on higher rates. >> republicans are willing to make sure we don't go over this fiscal cliff but at the same time don't harm this economy. what has to happen here if the president shows a little leadership we are willing to stay in the room and stay here and we are willing to get this done. that's why you saw a proposal that is raoeubl reasonable that meets his criteria. >> reporter: steny hoyer said in the next few days we will see substantive movement in private to get this done. jenna: we'll continue to watch the play-by-play, mike, thank you. jon: right now we are continuing to await a speech by former president george w. bush, the speakers are taking to the podium there to get ready to introduce the former president. he is set to address a conference there in dallas, where he will spotlight the positive impact of immigration on u.s. economic growth. this as the g.o.p. looks to attract more hiss to the party. meantime mr. bush's father, former president george h.w. bush is spending another day in the hospital bei
are in a deficit situation, as people have been discussing the past several weeks so there are potential in congress for the house and senate members. >> eric: billions of dollars. of taxpayers money that goes to the u.n. ambassador bolton, thank you for your insight. >> guest: thank you, eric. >> jamie: a fox news extreme weather alert. flood in effect for the west coast. yet another storm is approaching. folks are preparing for worst. severe weather threatening to bring more rain to an area that is already been drenched. chief meteorologist rick reichmuth live from the fox news extreme weather center. if you know rick is hanging out, it must be serious. how bad? >> really bad. this is the second batch of storms they have had this month. earlier in month, a lot of areas saw ten plus inchs of rain. now we have had another series of storms last week where we have seen ten plus inches of rain. the ground is saturated. this storm is windy. windy conditions across colorado, spreading across the intermountain west. the ground is saturated, if you take that wind and we will see more trees goin
and there should be the maximum spending cuts possible. i think that is not just true for the affect on the deficit, but because the deficit is being monatized at this point in time through quantitative easing it can result in great h greater inflation down the road. he would have thought this is not a time to raise taxes, this is a time to cut government spending. we don't want to have a larger government deficit and this is the course that would lead to the greatest prosperity in the economy. he would not have agreed that if we go over the fiscal cliff that that would have a negative impact on the economy, he would say rather that by bringing the deficit down, by having the prospect of lower inflation in the future, that will be good for interest rates and that would be good for the economy in the coming years. jenna: what would he say to those american citizens, though, that say, listen, over the fiscal cliff, i'm afraid of that, i don't even want to entertain the possibilities of what that would look like. >> i think when it comes to issues such as the extension of unemployment benefits, social
the business community views this deficit thing as the biggest problem that we can solve that we need to solve. there's something called a campaign to fix the debt, which i'm on the steering committee, 120 leading ceos from everything from general electric to jpmorgan on down. really committed to doing something and accepting the idea that revenues have to go up, not ideological about how, but most of all, wanting a big $4 trillion package. and so they have become, in effect, allies of the president. they're really trying to get to the same place. at some point there may be differences over how much entitlements, how much this or that, but right now their interests are aligned, and they both agreed to be friends again. and so they've spent a stream of business ceos into the white house. the president -- yesterday the business roundtable and gave a very warm and accommodating speech. and they are comrades in arms, the least for the time being. >> willie, what a big difference from what we heard from business leaders for the first four years. this is a pretty dramatic shift. >> or even just a fe
not represent the bowles simpson plan, nor is it the bowles plan in my testimony on deficit reduction. i simply took the mid point of the public offers, put forward during the negotiations to demonstrate where i thought a deal could be reached at the time. he's very much backing away from speaker boehner's letter. the question i wanted to ask you is some of the details, as you know, it's all in. >> can we spin one more point on that? >> absolutely. >> here's speaker boehner who is taking a mid point on the compromise between the two sides and offered it, and it's already flatley rejected? >> i think he may be rejected, sir, if i may -- >> i'm not talking about simpson -- erskine boelsz. i'm talking about the white house's response to it. >> let's get to that too. i think what erskine bowles is saying in his statement, that this letter from speaker boehner does not represent his theory, number one, but i think the line that the white house is having problems with, and i believe i found it in page two of the speaker's letter, i'll read it to you if i can. he says this, notably, the new revenue in
not contributed to the deficit. >>neil: show me an entitlement you would top. we are not talking about taking food away from the elderly, is there anything you would touch beyond taxing rich people? >>guest: we have to take a serious look at medicare. >>neil: your organization seems to put out, don't touch that, not now, not part of this deal. >>guest: what we saying, we can generate $950 billion of the $1.2 trillion we need over 10 years without eliminating or reducing benefits with medicare. i am also saying if we are looking for additional cuts and we need to do more everyone must be open. >>neil: but you are not open to the thing you said. you were one of the best speechers at the democratic convention but the speech ain't flying. it is implying it is on the republicans they better cough up more in taxes because we will keep feeding the beast. it is not about taming the beast but feeding the beast. >>guest: i need to say this, most of viewers watch this show now believe that all of us are involved in some kind of negotiation. that is not true. >>neil: there is nothing going on. >>guest: nothin
to be handed down the $60 trillion deficit. they will come to a deal. but right now, it's political theater. and it's probably going to look like the simpson-bowles. that will come full-circle again. >> here's a problem the republicans have got themselves into. is obama has been very clever here, the president. i think what he's done is skillfully said to the public, if he goes over the fiscal cliff, the republicans are prepared to make the entire middle class to pay more tax to save 2% of the wealthiest americans paying a little bit more. and that's a very bad position for the republicans to find themselves in, isn't it? >> it certainly is. it's a very bad position for them to find themselves in. the fact of the matter, it isn't true. raising taxes on the wealthiest americans will not only solve the problems. it doesn't even address the core problems. the core problems, $16 trillion in national debt comes from government overspending. and we have sluggish growth. raising the taxes on anybody, whether it's the poor or the middle class or the wealthiest americans, doesn't solve that problem.
the tax rate hike that he wanted, understand that we would continue to see trillion-dollar deficits for as far as as the eye can see. listen. washington has got a spending problem, not a revenue problem. >> and with the debt at $16 trillion and counting, boehner says the government cannot tax its way out oof this problem, shep. >> that's the fiscal cliff. now hurricane sandy and congress came up with some relief for folks who are still suffering, mike. >> that's right. president obama has asked congress for $64 billion in federal aid for new york, new jersey, and other states hammered by super storm sandy it would provide financial assistance to homeowners, businesses and local and state governments faced with the huge chore of cleaning up and rebuilding after the late october devastating storm. most new york and new jersey officials for the most part praised the request and asked congress to take quick action. speaker boehner's office says it has the paperwork and aides are reviewing it shep? >> shepard: good news. mike, turns out the super storm didn't effect the job market as muc
with respect to our deficit and debt is a national security liability. we need our senior leadership. we need a senior leadership to take it on. we have an opportunity to do so. we have a requirement to do so. at the foundation of national power is ultimately economic comment and in terms of global influence, in terms of the ability to support a military, the economic is foundation. and we have i think the united states, both an opportunity to require it to get our house in order, and i believe that our 100 senators and members of the house will step up on this and sufficient majority in the coming months. >> how do you look at your surplus of the u.s.? does that say we have america under our control? >> we are one of the closest allies of the united states. so of course our position today to united states is very, very decisive, strengthen our relationship. so these are not, there is no intention for us to try to use this kind of economic relationship in different context. so we are very satisfied with the current relationship with the united states. that's all spent let me open up to the fl
everything we've been hearing and reading, they do rank debt and the deficit very highly as a priority for elected officials to get done, to compromise and get to work. but they also made it very clear what they have made clear in every one of our previous 14 polls, and that is they want the debate to be connected to their real life and to things that they need to survive and thrive in this economy. the kitchen table discussion, if you will, is very important to them. so those priorities are very clear in their minds, and they are, they want good jobs, they want effective schools, they want affordable health care, they like social security, and today want to retire in -- they want to retire in dignity. they don't feel that, um, one has to embrace all of these priorities, but there is a framework here in this poll in the to-do list. there's a road map that the majority of americans believe would give their children a better chance at a better future. so people aren't necessarily hopeful that congress can deliver for them, but they are wishful. they very much want congress, a congress th
a significant, balanced approach to reduce our deficit our nation needs. so, wolf, here at the white house, they received this letter earlier in the day. they've had time to process it and clearly the white house not seeing this as something that they want to even bargain with. they've been saying that the next move is up to speaker boehner. and they wanted to see specific details so that they could actually begin the negotiations. what we see in this statement is that they feel he did not provide those details. now, the speaker and the president will see each other tonight we think at a holiday reception here at the white house. we'll see if they will actually discuss this, wolf. >> all right. the republicans hated the democratic initial proposal. the white house hates the republican counterproposal. we'll have much more in our next hour, jessica, thank you. >>> and you're in "the situation room." happening now, president obama issued a clear warning to the president bashar al assad. there will be consequences if you use chemical weapons against your own people. new details of the tragedy
a significant trade deficit. the value of their oil imports are greater than their exports to iran. this provision should lock up a substantial portion of iran's earnings from its oil sales in each of these countries. as for the financial executions will longer be able to transfer iran's oil earnings beyond their countries borders without fear of losing their access to the u.s. financial system, iran will be severely limited in its ability to transfer funds across jurisdictions. oil revenues will largely be shackled with a given country, and only usable to purchase goods from that country. as you might imagine, we have been hitting the road, making sure that our partners in the international financial community understand the significance of this provision. perhaps the greatest endorsement of our efforts has come from the iranian president himself. speaking in october, ahmadinejad said, "the enemy has announced it has introduced sanctions on the purchase of iran from iraq. even worse, it has imposed banking sanctions, meaning of some oil is sold, its revenues are not transferable t
before the joint select committee on deficit reduction, i simply took the midpoint of the public offers to demonstrate where i thought a deal could be reached at the time. he's very much backing away from speaking boehner's letter, but the question i wanted the to ask you -- >> can we spend one more point on that? >> of course. >> what did he say? that was the midpoint of a compromise from the two. so, here's speaker boehner who is taking a new point on the compromise between the two sides and offered it and it's already flatly rejected? >> i think what he might be rejecting, sir, if i may -- >> no, i'm not talking abo about erskine bowles. >> i think what he's saying in his statement, this letter from speaker boehner does not represent his theerly, number one, but i think the line the white house is have been problems with, i believe i found it in page two of the speaker's letter, he says this. notably, the new revenue in the bowles plan would not be a i chiefed through higher taxes, which we continue to oppose and will not agree to in order to protect small businesses and our economy.
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 60 (some duplicates have been removed)